Whatever happened to Ron Starr? - Ride the High Country (1962) Discussion

[–] hoya1960 19 years ago

I wondered the same question and ask a friend of mine who was an entertainment writer for the Los Angeles Times and she said that someone (NOT Joel McCrea or Randolph Scott) took him aside after seeing the final cut of "Ride the High Country" and suggested he pursue another line of work,other than acting......which he couldn't!!!

At the very beginning of the shooting of the movie, that was obvious and someone wanted to have him replaced before too much time had elapsed, but Joel McCrea and Randolph Scott interceded on his part and they kept him on, with the argument that his was not a central role to the success of the movie...which turned out to be accurate.

Today, they probably would have dropped him like a dime but McCrea and Scott still had some influence with the studios in the early 60's.

reply

[–] rosebud200320 19 years ago

Hi,
Well we know what happen to him.

Peace,
Amanda

reply

[–] Hancock_the_Superb 19 years ago

He stunk and they never used him again. As much as I liked this movie, when I was watching it I kept waiting for him to get whacked.

Until The Apache Is Taken Or Destroyed

reply

[–] sierra48-1 19 years ago

Just a guess - maybe the fact that his hair was already receding in the film didn't help his career.

reply

[–] spica123 19 years ago

Does make you wonder though, how somebody like him got cast in the first place, having to hold his own in scenes with two of the finest western actors of all time. Maybe he had connections?

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] xylonian-1 18 years ago

"I thought he was perfectly adequate."

I thought so too....

"It's only forgotten if you forget."
Wallace Dane Jurr

reply

[–] slokes 18 years ago

I liked him, too. He doesn't stand out, but he's not supposed to in the company of McCrea and Randolph. He makes the romance with Mariette Hartley's character totally believable and nicely underscores the tension between the Judd and Westrum by switching sides in a way that makes perfect sense to an audience, never an easy thing to communicate, especially without a big speech. He has a lot of work to do in this film, without calling attention to himself, and does so agreeably and, at times, colorfully.

If someone told me in 1962 that a fellow named R. Starr was en route to conquering the world, I might not have believed him from the evidence of this film, but this is a promising performance from another of those actors (Maggie McOmie, "THX 1138"; Donna Mullane, "The Optimists Of Nine Elms") Hollywood let slip away after just one big role.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] turtletommy 14 years ago

What was really so great about that stable, or the ??? films you listed? MGM may have tried to groom the actors you listed for big screen stardom but none really achieved any measure of major A-list stardom. Chamberlain probably achieved the biggest amount of fame from his TV work as Dr Kildare and later as king of the mini-series.

reply

[–] pocomarc 18 years ago

"maybe the fact that his hair was already receding in the film didn't help his career."

Poor sierra never heard of makeup.

John Wayne and Humphrey Bogart were completely bald for a number of years during their acting careers.

That didn't seem to hurt their "careers."

reply

[–] madbandit20002000 18 years ago

Just click on his name on this site. He got married to Hartley and retired from acting.

reply

[–] richardnj908 18 years ago

Gee, Hartley's bio doesn't mention that. Hmmm.

reply

[–] madbandit20002000 15 years ago

My mistake.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] amikelhenry 17 years ago

He ended up in politics becoming an independent counsel investigating the Clinton/Lewinsky affair.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Phillip Marlowe 17 years ago

This is a great movie, but Starr's performance was awful.

reply

[–] mach0017-1 11 years ago

You are thinking of Kenneth Starr.

reply

[–] wtl471629 16 years ago

I thought he was ok for his part but the main thing is that this movie was all about Randolph Scott and Joel McCrea. I do know that there were several stars like Randolph Scott and John Wayne who liked to give young stars a start in their movies and they used their influence to do so.

reply

[–] Woodyanders 15 years ago

It's a pity that Ron Starr didn't go on to have a bigger acting career after this film. I thought he was quite engaging as the brash Heck Longtree.

"We're all part Shatner/And part James Dean/Part Warren Oates/And Steven McQueen"

reply

[–] lastmidnite2 13 years ago

Maybe he was a ......oh how shall I put this?.......a "protege" of Mr. Scott's, and that's how he got and kept the part.

reply

[–] deforest-1 11 years ago

I saw him in a Bonanza episode made at least two years after this movie, and he did pretty well as a sociopathic gunslinger. Or do you assume he was a protege of one of the Cartrights as well? Maybe old Sheriff Roy Coffey?

reply

[–] mdonln 9 years ago

lastmidnite2 says > Maybe he was a ......oh how shall I put this?.......a "protege" of Mr. Scott's, and that's how he got and kept the part.

LOL, that's a good one and a nice way of putting it but it's not a very nice thing to say about the guy when you don't know if there was any truth to it.

Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply

[–] Doylenf 13 years ago

He was good enough to make me want to look him up on this message board--as did several others, obviously. And yes, I did wonder what happened to him. He was certainly a player who met the demands of the script adequately--and convincing enough in that first love scene with Mariette Hartley. I see that he did more TV work than films in the '60s.

reply

[–] EDGYED2 9 years ago

Absolutely on the money...well said.

reply